ArticleBasic and clinical andrology2013
FISH and tips: a large scale analysis of automated versus manual scoring for sperm aneuploidy detection.
Article in Basic and clinical andrology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Phenotypic continuum and poor intracytoplasmic sperm injection intracytoplasmic sperm injection prognosis in patients harboring HENMT1 variants.Andrology · 2025Article
- Sperm Meiotic Segregation Analysis of Reciprocal Translocations Carriers: We Have Bigger FISH to Fry.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Cytochalasin D restores nuclear size acting on F-actin and IZUMO1 localization in low-quality spermatozoa.International journal of biological sciences · 2023Article
- Male factor testing in recurrent pregnancy loss cases: A narrative review.International journal of reproductive biomedicine · 2022Review
- FISH and Chimps: Insights into Frequency and Distribution of Sperm Aneuploidy in Chimpanzees (International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Article
- Article
- Male infertility: establishing sperm aneuploidy thresholds in the laboratory.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2019Review
- Is sperm FISH analysis still useful for Robertsonian translocations? Meiotic analysis for 23 patients and review of the literature.Basic and clinical andrology · 2018Article
- Aneuploidy: a common and early evidence-based biomarker for carcinogens and reproductive toxicants.Environmental health : a global access science source · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundApproximately 1% of the spermatozoa found in ejaculate of healthy men are aneuploid and this rate increases in the population of subfertile and infertile men. Moreover, fertilization with these aneuploid sperm can lead to impaired embryo development. Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization (FISH) is the common cytogenetic tool used for aneuploidy screening on sperm. However, it is a time-consuming technique and cytogenetic or in vitro fertilization laboratories cannot routinely use it and face the increasing demand of such analyses before Assisted Reproductive Techniques (ART). As automation can be a clue for routine practice, this study compares manual and automated scoring of sperm aneuploidy rates using a Metafer Metasystems® device. The results obtained also contribute to global data about FISH on sperm cells.
methodsWe recruited 100 men addressed for sperm cryopreservation. They all signed an informed consent to participate in the study. 29 men were donors or consulted before vasectomy (control group) and 71 were suffering of Hodgkin's disease or non Hodgkin lymphoma (patient group). One semen sample was collected for each patient, analyzed according to WHO criteria and prepared for a triple-color FISH using centromeric probes for chromosomes 18, X and Y. Automated scoring was performed using a Metafer Metasystems® device.
results507,019 cells were scored. We found a strong concordance between the automated and the manual reading (d < 0.01 in Bland-Altman test). We also did not find a statistically significant difference between the automated and the manual reading using Wilcoxon test for total aneuploidy rate (p = 0.06), sex chromosomes disomy (p = 0.33), chromosome 18 disomy (p = 0.39) and diploidy (p = 0.21). Cumulative rate of total aneuploidy was 0.78% ± 0.212% for patient group and 0.54% ± 0.15 for control group and among this, sex chromosome XY disomy rate was of 0.54% for patient group and 0.27% for control group.
conclusionThis study validates the automated reading for FISH on sperm with a Metafer Metasystems® device and allows its use in a laboratory routine.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.